“Imagine, if you will, a court packed with people, waiting for the judge to come in. Some are dressed in suits, others are in various states, and I mean various states of undress. Disputes range from a Fortune 100 company with implications of over $1 million to income tax disputes of less than $1,000. Welcome to Tax Court.” It was with these words that tax Judge Paige Marvel began her address on Friday to the Graduate Tax program.

Marvel, who was invited to speak as part of the Enrichment Speaker Series, spent the morning giving the view from the bench of what she described as “really, a people’s court.” While one could easily assume that the tax courts deal overwhelmingly with complex corporate issues, the opposite is actually true. “Sixty-nine percent of our cases are taxpayers without representation, or pro se,” Marvel explained.

Such a heavy load of litigants who don’t have attorneys to guide them through the system means that some adjustments must be made. “Most pro se litigants come in without a clue how to prove their case,” Marvel said.

Luckily, such litigants can attempt to have their case heard as an ‘S case,’ which is a more informal process. In exchange for the increased simplicity, both the government and the taxpayer give up their right to appeal the outcome of the case.

Even still, judges must make adjustments when dealing with litigants without legal representation. “Every new tax judge must decide how they are going to deal with pro se litigants,” Marvel said. Without knowing how to prove their case, Marvel explained how she is sometimes put in the awkward position of being not only the fact-finder, but something of an advocate, asking questions to help the taxpayer present the relevant information.

Marvel told the students about a story that former Chief Judge Theodore Tannenwald used to enjoy telling to show that even litigants with representation might get these questions. “He got a little pro-active in asking questions, and the attorney didn’t like how it was going,” Marvel said, drawing chuckles from the crowd. “The attorney said ‘Judge, I don’t mind you asking questions, but don’t lose my case for me.”

Dealing with pro se litigants is but one of the challenges of Marvel’s job. Another significant challenge that Marvel described was that tax judges are statutorily required to travel to the taxpayer litigant. This not only means that she travels across the country to hear cases, but that the courtroom will sometimes just be an unused bankruptcy or district court courtroom. It also means, as Marvel explains, “We are the only federal court to have 12 bosses. Our opinions are reviewed by all of the courts of appeal except the federal circuit.”

Not only does this mean that different circuits will have “entirely different law” but that the level of deference that is given to the findings of the Tax Court will differ. Marvel said that she does her best to “appeal-proof” her decisions by being very explicit with her findings on issues of fact. A student wondered if this could be considered selfish, but Marvel took issue with that characterization, explaining that she was simply trying to “position [her] work-product so it gets an honest review.”